120 Responses to “MDUSD 10-22-12”

Huge protest about firing of NHS Soccer Coach Cristina Ballard — 7 students, 1 parent and 1 teacher spoke against the firing. Students have a Facebook page “We Want Ballard Back” that has 1400 followers. Only one “teacher-coach” left at Northgate. Athletic Director fired her on a Monday morning, and began immediately interviewing potential new coaches. http://www.facebook.com/#!/groups/434370506621201/?fref=ts

I was there… those folks were pretty passionate about her. So what’s the story about why she was fired as coach? I’m surprised I haven’t seen this in the paper. Theresa, what does the AD have to say about it? Seems the best way to protest is not to play.

One word that kept popping up, and I don’t know, but it was “organization”. Did McMorris feel she was “disorganized” ? McMorris is her “instructional leader” — has he not been working with her on that if he thought that was significant ? Remember its not just a soccer coach, but the whole team of basketball coaches, etc. Lots of turmoil in that school that is kept under wraps.

Kerri Mills signed the Agenda for the CVHS/CVCHS attendance boundary Item 9.16. I couldn’t help but wonder what SpecEd had to do with an “open boundary” decision for the Charter (since applying there is the student’s choice–not the District’s.

Well, there is ONE reason to declare that particular boundary as open—try to bleed even more students off of CVCHS and into Northgate!

The BOARD still has not taken any action on approving Mildred’s phony “leave of absence” — and the website still lists her as Asst. Supt and no reference to Kerri Mills as “Interim Asst. Supt.”. ZI hope that TH requests her “signed contract” which I thought had been requested, but apparently not. The date of the signature will be informative.

Substitute teacher costs and absenses are out of control in MDUSD. Candidate Debra Mason raised a huge issue during the PH Candidate Forum on Oct 18 — the enormous amount of substitutes used while classroom teachers are being trained or doing district business during INSTRUCTIONAL TIME ! I have raised this in the past, but am learning from my sources some interesting numbers — Steven Lawrence could save between $1 and $2 million dollars a year by cancelling all teacher training and teachers out of the classroom during instructional time for district or other school business. I am told that nearly 40% of all teacher substitutes are for non-sickness related matters such as instruction, data analysis, professional development, school business and district business. Incredibly, that accounts for over 6,000 instructional days by substitutes, instead of the regular classroom teachers. As Debra Mason points out, every time a substitute takes the place of a regular teacher,it impacts the quality and quantity of instruction, plus the continuity of the instruction. Apparently, Julie B-M has gone back over last year, and identified all substitutes by school, and separated out the various reasons for absences. The result is earth shaking to the public but seems to be of little concern to Steven Lawrence, Rose Lock and SASS. And they wonder why API only increases a few points ? Get a clue. Train the teachers on the minimum days AFTER childen have left the school.

Time to reform the substitute policy and central services accounting. Time to stop penalizing teachers like Jessica Precaido. Kudos to Debra Mason for leading on this issue. Attention CCT editors: endorse Mason!

Brian Lawrence also spoke about the high cost of the district’s data analysis requirements during the PH Forum, talking about a second-grade teacher who was pulled out of her class on the 13th day of school for training, leaving her 7-year-old students in the hands of a sub.

Regarding Preciado, I have heard that the board has agreed to standards that will be equitable for everyone, so some employees don’t feel they are being treated unfairly.

@#22 Yes, Brian did, and it was compelling. Like I said, Brian “talks the talk” but unsure if he will “walk the walk” since I still haven’t seen him reveal his 721 plus Facebook friends [which we already know include Eberhart, Whitmarsh and Strange] where he lists his occupation as “politician”. And there is that pesky thing about his ballot identification as “educator”, and then listing himself with a computer occupation in his recent Oct 5 financial disclosure. someone said he wanted to protect his children’s privacy — well he posted a pic of one of his children as his chief campaigner — cute picture.

Total absentee numbers and substitute costs would be “shocking” to the public if they saw them.

Why would Lawrence allow his staff to keep mummmm abut the shocking numbers? Why would the President of the Board apparently turn a blind eye and allow any school, let alone the very worst performing schools, to have a teacher absence rate of 12% to 20% for whatever cause?

Why hasn’t Whitmarsh [“I’m the only board member who actually has kids in district schools”] stood up at board meetings to bring to light the outrageous absentee/substitute numbers–especially since ‘her’ local schools Oak Grove and YVHS are among the worst offenders–AND worst performers? As YVHS’s perennial PTA ‘leader’ she should not need a report from district staff to know how bad things are at her school.

What corporation (even if they didn’t have to hire outside coverage) would sit back and ignore the fact that their employees, on average, miss work one out of every 5-10 days?

Yet, I recall a few years ago, when many pink-slipped teachers wanted to attend mandatory layoff hearings, the district discouraged them from doing so, saying it would cost too much money for subs.

I think I recall Eberhart asking for more data on subs after the Sun Terrace revolving door of subs — and corresponding lack of learning in classrooms — came to light, when parents complained to the board. However, it’s possible this information may be given to him privately, instead of at a public board meeting. Still, any such information given to a board member is public information. But if no board member ever mentions receiving it, it’s pretty hard for the public to know to ask for it.

Why are taxpayers tired of school overspending and won’t pass 30 or 38 ? 40% of teacher substitutes for non-illness reasons is over the top and is one example of many finance irresponsibility. Having a substitute in a class is almost as bad as a furlough day as far as the students are concerned. Lisa Boje put it nicely at the Board meeting when she said the SIG schools are concerned how they are going to maintain the improvements when the SIG Grants end in June. There will be no more “increased instructional time” every day REQUIRED by the SIG grants — Lawrence will take it away [he has to cover his raise and the BIG5]. SASS has expanded like a helium balloon from 9 employees to 31 in just 27 months and now occupies two buildings when Lawrence said it would save $50,000. What a joke that was. Now we learn that 40% of substitutes are used so teachers can be out of the classroom at other activities ? Taxpayers are FED UP and I can’t blame them. Unfortunately when the Props don’t pass — Lawrence won’t recommend rescinding the BIG5 raises that impact their retirements, he won’t recommend eliminating SASS, he won’t sell the schools now used for Pete Pedersen or Willow Creek. Instead, he will recommend cuts that affect the classroom. Maybe they should give themselves 30 furlough days and hire substitutes to teach the children while they are furloughed — it would be cheaper.

Sun Terrace was a different issue. Began with hiring a principal with a horrible track record from outside the district without proper background investigation, the SASS instructional coach was asleep at the switch, but got promoted to an Asst Supt elsewhere, SASS is not properly supervised by the Asst. Supt, Personnel ignored the substitute problem, and thus “no one” — yet everyone — knew about the problems but just ignored them until it was too late. The only people who suffered were the children — all the adults are still employed.

Theresa: It was at the April 23 board meeting. “Trustee Gary Eberhart asked Superintendent Steven Lawrence to report back to the board about the issues raised…” by the parents and staff at Sun Terrace.

That report has never been made to the board-or to the public! But it may be about to punch another hole in the sinking ship.

For four l-o-n-g years, the public has simply been given right-face-left-face lip service by Eberhart and Whitmarsh’s blowhard promises and requests–and Lawrence knows it!

Why are these publicly-made board requests just ignored for months and months, or, in many cases, just never heard of again? Did Rolen tell Lawrence where the bodies are?

Steven Lawrence may have boxed himself into a wet paper bag with Sun Terrace’s being named a Program Improvement school and his tinkering with all the FTE’s at the other sites that he won’t be able to box himself out of. Soon a letter will go to ALL parents at Sun Terrace giving them the NCLB choice of moving schools to a non-PI school WITH TRANSPORTATION PAID BY THE DISTRICT. Based on the horrible track record at ST, many parents may opt to go to one of the better elementary schools since transportation is paid for. This may develop into an overcrowding situation at the other schools and leave ST with half empty classes or worse classes that are 20% down. If a lot of parents choose the better schools, which I expect they might, it will be a whale of a mess for Lawrence, Rose Lock and Transportation. Another sideshow at the MDUSD circus.

Similarly, Oak Grove MS also saw a huge decline (and has been in PI for years).
An issue that I learned from the whistle-blowers was that the district often hires subs who don’t have teaching credentials. They can only work 60 days, I believe.
So, at schools like Oak Grove, where it is difficult to attract highly qualified teachers, some classes are taught by a string of subs all year long because they don’t have all their positions filled when the school year starts. Obviously, it’s difficult for students to learn in that type of environment.
This issue was also raised at the last CAC meeting regarding the extended school year. Sometimes, teachers without credentials are hired at the last-minute and don’t have time to adequately prepare lessons. This is due to NCLB, which requires the district to look for highly qualified teachers until school starts, according to staff. Then, when no highly qualified teachers can be found, the district can hire those without credentials.

Theresa, if that is true, and non-qualified subs can work 60 out of 183 days—the kids don’t even have real teachers up to 30% of the time! No wonder we’ve sunken to near bottom of the state academically.

So when Lawrence and (one example) McClatchy reply to a Williams Act review they can just say: “We couldn’t help it; our teachers get sick A LOT, so we had about 1800 “emergency” days this past school year!

As Preciado pointed out, subs at these challenging schools get paid more than subs at higher-performing schools. The district took that differential out of Preciado’s paycheck. But, apparently, it won’t do that anymore.
So, now the district will have to pay more money out of its general fund for subs at its poorest performing schools. One solution to this would be to improve the schools, to attract and retain more highly qualified teachers willing to work full-time in the district.

So, “Doctor” J @20, you’d like to “Train the teachers on the minimum days AFTER childen (sic) have left the school.”

Say the kids leave by 1pm, the kindergarten kids at 1:30. Then the teachers travel to the training spot, so they start at 2pm. They leave at 3:30. What do you think they’ll learn in 90 minutes?

Are you going to pay for the mileage they’ll all claim? Or do you want the trainers to travel to all 50+ school sites? When will teachers have site staff meetings?

The district could have teachers begin a week before students report, and do some intensive training then. But that might be logical. MDEA would never go along with it – but then, this was the group that gave away its own benefits and now mewls how badly they’re being treated.

@FT, did you forget the Principals are supposed to be the “instructional leader” ? Perhaps you ignored that part of the memo. No travel necessary. That way you would really find out which Principals are really up to “owning” the instructional improvement at their sites. Right now, who is holding the principals accountable for their required “instructional observations” of individual teachers ? Remind us FT, how many times a year is that supposed to be happening ?

Sorry FT, pushed the button too soon. And how many hours PER WEEK of personalized instruction and coaching are each principal getting from their SASS coach ? That was the whole purpose of SASS when Lawrence formed it. Its not happening as we saw the last two years with Sun Terrace. This year the brand new Principals [recruited from other districts] are flopping like fish in a boat because their SASS coaches are no where to be seen.

Hey FT, where is the “Annual Evaluation” of SASS members based on the Supt’s proposed and Board adopted criteria ? Not a single person in SASS has been held accountable. Here is what Steven Lawrence proposed and the Board adopted in May 2010 — no Board approved changes since then. “The members of this new department will be annually evaluated based on criteria that also include:
1. Whether or not the schools they support meet or exceed the growth targets identified by the State for school-wide and subgroup API data;
2. Whether or not the EL students in the schools they support make annual progress on the CELDT. Our goal is that all EL students are redesignated English proficient within six years of entering our schools.
3. Whether or not all students are making measurable gains on district benchmark assessments that measure students’ progress toward mastery of the State standards;
4. Whether or not our high schools are increasing the graduation rate, increasing the number of students completing CTE pathways, increasing the percentage of students taking AP classes and achieving a 3 or better on the end of course assessments, increasing the percentage of students taking the SAT/ACT, and increasing the SAT/ACT scores for all subgroups of students on an annual basis.
5. Annual principal surveys that focus on whether or not principals feel supported in moving their schools forward.”
Who was held accountable for coaching Sun Terrace for two years into Program Improvement ? What about Westwood’s drop in API ? And the rest ? And who in SASS should be congratulated for the massive gains of the SIG schools due to the increased instructional time ? I didn’t see any recognition of their SASS coaches at the District Board meeting.

No on Prop 30 and 38; Yes on 32. I will vote no on all MDUSD future taxes and measures for years until I see real reform at the State level and the MDUSD level.

We need true education funding reform, not bandaid propositions that enable the state to remove the funds for their pet projects. This is the best reform they come up with, Prop 30? Why does 30 only have cuts in spending on Education? Where is the cut in spending on the all the other frivolous spending? Why do they continually use children, who have no say in this matter, as pawns? Why should we pay more taxes for education as proposed in 38, when we already pay some of the highest tax rates? Shouldn’t that money be used to fund Education, our Police, and Fire?

I don’t have any more tax dollars and refuse to continually give to a system that is untruthful, not transparent, spends money carelessly, instead of really cutting out the nonsense spending – State and local levels. High Speed Rail for the State and the SASS department at MDUSD are perfect examples. MDUSD had money for thousands of dollars in raises? They couldn’t give any of that to the students?

Clean up your act MDUSD. You are a disgrace and will continue to be until you become accountable for your policies and actions. It’s a joke how your requests for reports at Board Meetings go unanswered, all the back door deals, etc. Can you not even create a simple action list with running action items from board meetings with due dates for completion that are put the on upcoming agendas accordingly? Is it that difficult for all the education you all have? Board actions and requests are a total waste of your breath. If you can’t tell, I’m also voting no on Whitmarsh.

Since 2 years ago, nearly half of California voters voted by absentee ballots, if the CCT Editorial Board waits much longer, they will become irrelevant. http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/hist_absentee.htm
Where are the campaign finance statements due yesterday ?

How important are principals to the success of student achievement ? “Our results indicate that highly effective principals raise the achievement of a typical student in their schools by between two and seven months of learning in a single school year; ineffective principals lower achievement by the same amount. These impacts are somewhat smaller than those associated with having a highly effective teacher. But teachers have a direct impact on only those students in their classroom; differences in principal quality affect all students in a given school.” Interesting article in Education Next. MDUSD still doesn’t have an effective Principal evaluation program. http://educationnext.org/school-leaders-matter/

Flippin’ Tired, you made exactly the same points I thought of when I read Doctor J’s posts about training. Saying training should be done during the non-class hours of minimum days makes no sense. It is completely impractical. You are also right about it being a MDEA issue if they tried to do training outside of school hours.

I’ll also add that too much teacher training is definitely NOT a problem with MDUSD. One of the reasons CVCHS will probably end up with higher API scores is because they plan to put MORE emphasis on teacher training. They wrote about it in the charter plan. It was one of the reasons they wanted to convert to a charter school.

@FT&G: MDEA doesn’t have a problem with teacher training — as long as teachers are paid for it. MDEA demonstrated by their MOU’s with the SIG schools that a longer school day is fine — as long as teachers are paid for it. As the article from Ed Next points out, the Principal can become an effective instructional leader — teaching after observing the teacher in action. Nothing extra about that.

I have been working on an indepth story looking at the WCCUSD’s attempt to turnaround its lowest-performing comprehensive high school by replacing the principal and one of the vice principals.
Strong, effective leaders who are well-supported by the district and community are key to successful school improvement, according to WestEd.

“Principal and teacher quality account for nearly 60% of a school’s total impact on student achievement, and principals alone for a full 25% (Marzano et al., 2005).” WCCUSD seems to be on the right track taking ACTION. MDUSD is spending all their time thinking and not taking any ACTION. http://www.newleaders.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/EP-Exec-Summary.pdf

I think it would be great to see administrators responsible for teaching at least one class (or a portion of the day or a particular subject in lower grades). I find that many of them didn’t (or haven’t) spent a lot of time in the classroom (along with many educational “gurus”), and it would great to see them “in action” so I can watch them model what they tell me I should do, and then we can look at the performance they get out of their students and see how effective they are. I understand that at City College in San Francisco one of their cost saving measures is to have department chairs go back to the classroom.

This recommendation does NOT allow Rose Lock and Linda May to protect their friends and retirements.
“Effective principals are those who boost academic achievement for all students, increase the effectiveness of theirteaching staffs, and consistently take leadership actions shown to improve outcomes for students. Therefore principal evaluation systems1 should place 70% of their weight on the ability of principals to increase student achievement and teacher effectiveness outcomes, with the remaining 30% focused on their demonstration of effective practices and leadership actions. Local school systems should then use these assessments to drive not only key accountability decisions,but also to support professional learning and growth.”http://www.newleaders.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/EP-Exec-Summary.pdf
Double digit API declines would doom the principals: Gregory Gardens -24, Silverwood -22, Westwood -33, Oak Grove Middle -37, Valley View Middle -19. Single digit API drops combined with not meeting school or student groups growth targets should be cause for reassignment: Cambidge, Vahalla, Ygnacio Valley E., Riverview Middle, and of course Sue Brothers and Kate McClatchy at the high schools. Single digit API gains with not meeting the school or student growth targets would be on a watch list.

A bad teacher (which is fairly rare IMHO) will depress learning for their classes.

A bad principal (which I don’t think is that rare in the MDUSD will depress learning for an entire school. Although some poor performing principals, are also suffering from a lack of district support–Sue Brothers is defintely not suffering from a lack of support).

Here’s where it gets ugly:
A bad Superintendent like Stevie Lawrence (and he is without a doubt the worst superintendent in CA) depresses the learning of the entire district that has the misfortune to suffer him.
Of course this also applies to the board that hired him!

It’s interesting to see how often education discussions get polarized between whether the problem is “bad teaching” or “bad students/parenting”. The people who almost always get off the hook in these debates are the administrators whose job it is to actually MANAGE the system. They are all too often accorded no accountability for outcomes. Unlike WAM, I don’t believe that poor teachers are “rare” in MDUSD — a minority certainly, but not rare. But every organization has to cope with occasional employees who cannot perform as expected.

Who is responsible for recruiting poor teachers in the first place? Who is responsible for the reputation of the district that helps determine the size and quality of the applicant pool? Who was supposed to communicate performance expectations to new teachers? Who was responsible for evaluating them and giving feedback? Who was responsible for giving coaching to teachers who were not succeeding? Who was responsible for terminating teachers who could not do their jobs?

The answer to ALL of those questions is “MDUSD administrators”. I realize that the unions can play an obstructive, unhelpful role in these issues. And shame on them for defending teachers who clearly can’t do their job. I’ve seen it happen. But school districts aren’t the only organizations in the world that have to cope with unionized labor. There are constructive — and destructive — ways to manage a unionized work force.

Where are the demands for more accountability from school district administrators — the ones who manage, defend, and exploit their monopoly so successfuly?

Often over looked is that the 5 schools with double digit declines in API 2012 [-19 to -37] that I highlighted in #62, ALL of them had positive API gains in 2011[+6,+7,+5,+1,+8]. Something significant happened at those schools in 2012 — and the first suspect is the Principal. 3 Elementary and 2 Middle Schools. And then there is Sun Terrace . . .

Often over looked is that the 5 schools with double digit declines in API 2012 [-19 to -37] that I highlighted in #62, some had positive API gains in 2011 [GG +1, SilvW +11, VV +3 and Westwood and OakGrove declines of -6 and -4].Sun Terrace had a -37 point decline in 2012 and -4 point decline in 2011. Something significant happened at those schools in 2012 — and the first suspect is the Principal. 3 Elementary and 2 Middle Schools.

Jim, Barbara Oaks discussed these issues during her editorial board interview, saying she had let some teachers go before tenure and that she tried to persuade those who weren’t successful in the classroom to look for other jobs within the district.

School Teacher: When Lianne Cismowski was a vp at MDHS, she did teach at least one class. I’m not sure if other teachers observed her, or what her results were. But, she is a National Board Certified Teacher who later became an administrator. She also mentored other teachers seeking National Board Certification.

So with all the talk of teacher training. Why do we have short days? When are the teachers trained? Do they use the short days for prep or is it just early day off? Are they paid for full hours? I was under the impression that early days were for teacher development?

Each school organizes their “short” day. I can speak for my school and for a few others-these weekly afternoon sessions are jam packed with data analysis and instructional planning, staff development, and committee work to continue refining programs and practice. The district’s focus on Response to Intervention (RtI) also requires additional collaboration and likely will result in student learning.

For what it costs in ongoing annual contracts, certification of teachers and administration, travel pay, substitute teacher pay, etc. etc. I would hope RtI will more than just “likely” result in student learning.

Once ‘certified’ are administrators being utilized fully to cross-train and pass that knowledge on to others in the district? Or must we continue to contract with RtI –indefinitely — while those same administrators go on the road, promoting RtI to earn “personal bucks” off of RtI training that we have paid for?

Compared to costs per child for RtI, how much does this district pay to really help advancement of GATE students?

#71 Yes, would like to see these administrators step into the classroom and demonstrate what it is they say they want to see and what teachers aren’t doing, easier said than done. MDHS principal has balked at coming into classes to demonstrate. Cismowski is terrific.

#80 Part of the challenge of the profession is that teaching historically been a very isolated and independent job where teachers work within their four walls without benefitting from the expertise, experiences, and knowledge of others around them.

Embedding time to collaborate with others at a site is important, but as a classroom teacher can become isolated at a site, a site can become isolated, as well. There is an important synergy and extended knowledge base that is created by bringing teachers together from various sites. Our schools are VERY different and we are much better when we are moving together, rather than as separate cogs in a wheel. The opportunities created for this collaboration are invaluable. The experiences teachers have had recently at the “symposiums” and data meetings have been very useful and informative.

I anticipate that someone will suggest that an administrator who attends meetings and trainings could bring the information, learning, etc. from district events to the site. Yes and no. If everything were to be delivered second-hand and all knowledge were to be held by an individual, it would be very unproductive and ineffective. The responsibility cannot be placed on one person.

Monday morning at Chevron: CCT Sunday editorial painting Chevron management as unethical in dealing with MDUSD; booze, secret meetings to avoid “receipts” at Superintendent’s home, $15,000 campaign contributions, a MDUSD Board trustee who is a management employee at Chevron. Chevron’s image is tarnished. Should be an interesting day at Chevron.

@Teacher#81 Professional Development or “Continuing Education” of teachers should NOT take away from “instructional time” by employing substitutes. How do you rationalize that 40% of the teacher absences requiring substitutes are for professional development, data analysis, and school and district meetings ?

It’s reassuring to be vindicated by the CCT editors who pull no punches regarding Whitmarsh, the bond scandal and the lack of transparency. They lay the CVHS charter at the Dent doorstep where it belongs. Even better would be to add-in no particular order-the bathroom scandal, the busing chaos, the special education failures, school closure mistakes, and the SASS boondoggle. Don’t forget how great employees like Denise Rugani were driven away. Next time I’d encourage the editors to go in depth on the education issues that still adversely impact the children in this most dysfunctional district.

@Anon#86– I believe Sherry’s “selling her soul” began with ButtercupGATE — Sherry refused to deny that she was there when asked point blank on this blog. However, maybe it goes back to her 2008 election financing, since it appears there were many back and forth contributions with Eberhart. I am not sure Sherry raised any of that money. She failed to file her campaign donation disclosures due Oct 5, and now it appears she missed Oct 25 too. Does not appear she is being very open and transparent. What is she hiding ?

I have reposted the editorial in a separate blog post, so blog readers can comment on it there: http://www.ibabuzz.com/onassignment/2012/10/29/contra-costa-times-editorial-board-endorses-lawrence-and-mason-in-mdusd-race/
Like the editorial board, I was surprised when Oaks said she didn’t realize initially that Measure C would fund school improvements. She said she was asked (by the district) if she would support a bond measure to fund solar projects, which would end up saving energy costs and generating money for the general fund. This admission, which the editorial board found “stunning,” reinforces the widely-held belief that the main goal of the bond measure appears to have been to fund solar projects and that the list of projects appears to have been thrown together hastily, with little input from school sites.
On March 16, 2010 — one week after the board voted to put the bond measure on the ballot — Pete Pedersen sent a memo to site administrators asking them to review their requests from the 2002 Measure C and update their priorities. He also attached a list of tentative projects, based on the 2002 priorities he thought had not yet been completed. He asked that site administrators return the lists by March 30, 2010, stating that if he didn’t receive any revisions, he would assume their priorities remained unchanged, for a Facility Master Plan update that he expected to complete by April 9, 2010. (Again: this was AFTER the board approved a $348 million bond measure, which shows that the district really had no clear idea of what it planned to spend that money on, other than solar.)
I received copies of all the responses Pedersen received. The response from CPHS noted that 10 out of 14 projects on his tentative list had already been done. Instead, CPHS named the following three projects as priorities: telephone system, Wi-Fi, and “new grass athletic field with proper grading and drainage.” The CPHS list also noted a request for paving between wings in all but planter areas, with proper grading and drainage, including paving the area next to the gym.
The request is not signed, so it’s unclear if Oaks was the one who filled out the form. But, since she didn’t retire until June, 2011, it would appear that she was the one responsible for it. So, it’s unclear why she said she wasn’t aware that a majority of the funds would pay for school site improvements, unless the district had not clearly informed principals of that fact.

The entire bs of Pedersen not knowing which projects had been completed by 2002 money is just that–bs. He was the district asst. supt directly overseeing what the project management company was doing.

Asking school admins to go over lists to see if their “priorities had changed”–more bs when you look at the shuffling of admins from site to site. Who knew what had been completed at their old site, or what priorities had been listed by the ex-admin at their current site? Pedersen knew–but solar was the name of the game that was only being played in the back rooms at the district.

Considering the context of the skewed information we were all being fed to get both bonds passed, who among us, including the Times Editorial Board, knew in 2002 that a main goal was to build and prepare to build new schools in Bay Point, and just throw up dozens of modulars/portables in Concord? Who knew in the Spring of 2010 that priority #1 of the new bond was solar?

Much of (not all, but maybe a good majority) the learning and collaboration can and should be done virtually – teleconferences are relatively easy to set up and maintain, and are cost effective. Virtual sessions cut way down on travel time (and travel reimbursements), cut out time away from “the office”, while providing the much needed “face time” and collaborative dialogs sessions many need / find beneficial. Virtual sessions can be captured / recorded and referred back to and shared with others as appropriate as learning tools.

#94 and #83 – Many professions not only provide paid time for professional development or continuing education, but also provide incentives. They do not require training to occur on personal time though I’m sure employees are more than encouraged to continue learning on their own, as are we.

The specific trainings mentioned earlier are meant to be delivered district and site-wide so that positive instructional learning impact will be across the district. If we attempted to train in a “continuing education” fashion, then we would not have systemic reform. We would have a smattering of learning that is not focused or centralized.

We used to have staff development days sprinkled throughout the year so that we could engage in ongoing learning and collaboration activities. Those are long gone so we are left with the option of being released from our classrooms. It is definitely not optimal and there are surely newer methods to be utilized, but those would take $$ to implement – updating hardware, wiring, facilities…..

Teacher and Sooo Frustrated, “Doctor” J knows more about what happens at school sites than you do, even though you actually work there.

“Doctor” J also thinks principals should be instructional leaders, in between principal meetings, parent meetings, IEP meetings, SST meetings, 504 meetings, Title 1 meetings, student discipline, suspensions, writing the Single Plan for Student Achievement, writing the Safety Plan, attending PTA meetings, chairing the Site Council, multiple teacher evaluations over a single school year…and about a few hundred other things that principals have to do.

“Doctor” J, I invite you to step from behind your district desk and actually visit a school site. Pick any one. I doubt you’ll find the principal with his/her feet up, eating bonbons and watching the security camera feed. Every principal I’ve ever met needs roller skates and extra-strength vitamins.

If you can come up with a time to teach principals everything they should be teaching the teachers, and the time in which to do this teaching, paste your plan here and we’ll all applaud. But be sure you don’t take the principals off campus, or you’ll just be complaining that they don’t spend enough time on campus. Ready…set…GO!

@95 Teacher — You’ve put your finger on the problem, which I see all over, not just in cash-strapped CA. Districts have reduced PD days, making it difficult to do any kind of face-to-face training. (You may think that many professionals still have that in the private sector, but that is not my experience. All but the largest companies have cut back on in-house professional training, except where employees are getting trained on a specific new critical system, where the vendor includes training in the contract.) These days, knowledge employees typically learn whatever they can on their own time, often finding their own instruction, as they try to keep their skills updated and maintain their marketability in a volatile job market.

Teachers are at a specific disadvantage in this new world. They are some of the most isolated professionals anywhere in the economy. As a private sector employee, I had interactions (meetings, calls, emails etc.) all day long with peers, people who supported my function, and the people I supported. It was relatively easy to see if I was falling behind, skill-wise, or if someone else needed some additional training. In the typical school district, however, two teachers with dramatically different approaches (and student outcomes!) can be teaching almost next to one another, and the less successful one will never realize what she could be doing better. That needs to change.

Virtual training is going to be the wave of the future, and teachers will be expected, more and more, to do it on their own time. The technology can be expensive, but not nearly as expensive as hiring substitutes (and bearing the costs of that essentially lost student instruction time). The good news is that there are more and more good tools out there that make it much more viable for teachers to learn collaboratively and work together, even when they aren’t together in the same room. Our students are learning how to learn in that fashion (albeit with almost no help from their schools), and I suspect their teachers will have to catch up with them, if they want to continue to maximize their impact on student learning.

@Teacher, Most professionals have “continuing education” requirements to maintain their licences — doctors, lawyers, etc. Many have to pay out of their pockets and attend on weekends and nights. Teachers don’t.I agree with you that systemic reform is important. To do that in a district, it needs to be led by the Supt. But don’t take away from instructional time. The real smoke screen is that 40% of the substitute costs[buried in the budget] amount to a few million dollars that could be used foracross the board training. However, the KEY is that each principal must get her or his “instructional team” in synch. When you think of what a principal should be doing: think how Bruce Bochy managed the SF Giants to two World Championship in three years with essentially two differnt rosters. He built unity and maximized the use of the talent. That’s what a Principal should do — but its awful hard when Julie B-M has some clerical person filling your roster of teachers “with the next person on the list.” @FT, you want to know how upside down MDUSD is in how it expects its principals to “do everything” ? Ask some of the experienced Principals who transfered in from other districts this year how screwed up MDUSD is. Try Charla Hernandez, Angela Hotchkiss, and Kristan Martin-Meyer — if they dare talk since they all have been warned of the vindictiveness in MDUSD for not towing the company line.

Teacher: Measure C is providing the money to needed to use more state-of-the-art technologies. Now that the solar projects are up and running, the district is moving onto its lower priority items, such as updating hardware, wiring and facilities.
The district also has established a technology committee tasked with looking at what types of technology to purchase with Measure C money. Now is the time to speak up, if anyone has suggestions. But, of course, I don’t know when this committee meets, since I don’t think agendas or minutes are posted. However, I believe Rose Lock is heading it up.

Speaking of the lists of projects, I have just received the following email from the Drama teacher at Sequoia MS, urging the Sequoia community to purchase the “Chasing Rodriguez” DVD so the school can get a stage in its multiuse room:

“Hello Everyone,
Here’s just some information on the movie I was in a couple of years back. You can now order it for $17.95 and $3 of every purchase will go into a stage fund.
I am trying to get a new stage for Sequoia Middle School. I would like one with lights and sound. It would also be nice not to hear every step that a student takes. This is a very professional video and kid friendly.
Thanks for thinking about it and make it a great day!
Jane Enloe
Sequoia Middle School
Drama/6th Grade Core”

The interesting thing about this is that former Sequoia MS Principal Hellena Postrk (who is now a SASS coach) specifically requested a new stage as her number 2 priority (behind air conditioning) on the Measure C “Review of Site Facility Needs” that she submitted to Pete Pedersen back in March of 2010. Now, more than two years later, the school has solar panels and is getting air conditioning, but apparently the staff there still has not been given any assurance that it will get the stage it has been asking for since 2010. So, it has resorted to establishing its own “stage fund,” even though Pleasant Hill taxpayers are spending millions in Measure C money to pay for school improvements in their community.

Lorie Davis has sent out a CAC update that says Supt. Lawrence is refusing to provide the third party analysis based on attorney-client privilege, but she is more hopeful about receiving specific information about comparable districts.
She said parents are also complaining their phone calls are not being returned, so Kerri Mills is instituting a new procedure where parents should call Chris Wilburne if they don’t get calls back within 48 hours.
Davis also reports that Lawrence now says the FCMAT special ed report will be released in Dec. or Jan. and that the next CAC meeting is at 7 p.m. Tuesday, Nov. 6 (election night).
Unfortunately, this update does not yet show up on the CAC blog.

The CAC is correct that phone calls are not being returned but, Kerri Mills is not returning calls as well. Falling on deaf ears. Watch out Special Ed. Parents….Our district is swirling down the toilet!

Holy Cow ! You have to read the FCMAT Transportation report for Ocean View USD — remember all that bull manure that FCMAT spewed about its secret knowledge of “majority” of districts transporting Special Ed Students only about 10% of the district enrollement ??? Well on Oct 8, 2012, just a month after the infamous MDUSD report, FCMAT says: “In total, the district provides transportation to 24.4%
of its total special education student population . . .” Pretty much in line with MDUSD but clearly not in line with FCMAT’s hocus pocus conclusions for MDUSD WITHOUT ANY FACTS OR DATA EXCEPTION PURE CONJECTURE. Read it and weep Bill Gillaspie. Hey Special Ed Parents, better download and copy this report before Lawrence and Rolen have FCMAT remove it ! Mark the inconsisenties with the MDUSD report. http://wwwstatic.kern.org/gems/fcmat/OceanViewSDfinalreport942.pdf

I admire the integrity of this teacher, principal, and superintendent who did their duty and reported another teacher for cheating on the STAR tests. If this had happened in MDUSD, would the teacher, principal and superintendent done the same thing ? Read page two of the report. http://www.mydesert.com/assets/pdf/J11964911030.PDF

#97 – Jim – Once again, I appreciate your thoughtful, respectful response to my post. You clearly have specific knowledge about the topic and are willing to dialogue without ranting and railing. I believe that your posts are productive and informative.
I hope that you will consider joining the team that Theresa refers to in #99. It sounds like you would have useful insight, experience and information to offer.

#99 Theresa – It is an exciting prospect to think about upgraded schools. I’m a bit skeptical though as so much of our past “upgrading” is jerryrigged, with wires encircling rooms, hallways and buildings. Many our our schools are more than 50 years old and need major building renovations. They have been patched together for too long.

Did Sun Terrace parents get their NCLB letter giving them transfer rights with PAID TRANSPORTATION because Sun Terrace earned the dubious honor of “Program Improvement” ? If so, are you moving your child to a higher performing school ?

@TH#101 Lorie Davis said: ” Validation of statements made when comparisons were made to other districts. Dr. Mills has contacted FCMAT and expects to send me a summary in the next couple of days.” Well now, it will be interesting to compare the responses Theresa got from Bill Gillaspie for the same question ! Theresa, where was your post on that issue ? Cn’t find it.

MDHS is participating in a “Creating Supportive Schools for LGBTQ Youth in Contra Costa County” event from 9-3:30 p.m. Saturday: http://bit.ly/Ytb0UL
Cost is $10 for adults.
There will also be a free Gay-Straight Alliance Leadership Summit for youth ages 13-24 at the same time, which is free: https://www.gsanetwork.org/civicrm/event/info?reset=1&id=127
Deadline is 3 p.m. Friday to register for youth conference.

It looks like the board will wait to implement the strategic plan until after the election.

During the PH candiate’s forum, Whitmarsh said she thought the board would review a plan regarding the district’s disproportionality in November. But,it looks like that will wait until after the election too.

@TH#114 Remember that the new board members won’t be sworn in until probably December because the election results won’t be certified. So while Eberhart is now a lame duck, perhaps Sherry will be a lame-duck after the election. They still could pass a lot of things prior to the changing of the guard.

As previously mentioned, the MDUSD principal noted in my blog post is Liane Cismowski, who is now an elementary principal, after previously working as a vice principal/teacher at MDHS and as a teacher at Olympic HS. She has also served on the National Certification Board for teachers.

Here’s what Arne Duncan said about the schools making improvement: “…what’s clear already is that almost without exception, schools moving in the right direction have two things in common; a dynamic principal with a clear vision for establishing a culture of high expectations, and talented teachers who share that vision, with a relentless commitment to improving instruction.”

Based on the MDUSD SIG presentation, it seems that most SIG schools in the district share these traits. I have also heard (and observed) that Mary Louise Newling at Meadow Homes is fostering a similar culture there. Can the same be said of Oak Grove MS?